I've heard reports of up to 6 billion in military vehicles are being left behind for scrap in other countries when we leave. WHY?

SPC Eddie Espejo — Mon, 10 Oct 2016 16:27:46 -0400

Response by MSG Chris Allen made Oct 10 at 2016 4:28 PM

MSG Chris Allen — Mon, 10 Oct 2016 16:28:51 -0400

too expensive to ship back

Response by Sgt Wayne Wood made Oct 10 at 2016 4:33 PM

Sgt Wayne Wood — Mon, 10 Oct 2016 16:33:35 -0400

so the chinese can sell us cheap steel?

Response by SFC George Smith made Oct 10 at 2016 4:43 PM

SFC George Smith — Mon, 10 Oct 2016 16:43:50 -0400

WHY ???... stupidity...

Response by CPO Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 10 at 2016 5:30 PM

CPO Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 10 Oct 2016 17:30:02 -0400

Yes, we are, the reason is to help out the countries, we are working with, and it is cheaper to leave the over used non sensitive equipment be hind, we are leaving first gin Hummers, and 1st gin MRAPS with out the EFP blast shields, and other sensitive armor.

My detachment in Pakistan, we left $ 6 million worth of Engineering Equipment behind, but the stuff we left behind was past it's service date times, and our Engineering fleet was being updated, and replaced back in the states. The other stuff that was left behind by the Task Force was a old M.A.S.H. Hospital that is no longer in service. This was the last M.A.S.H. standing 212th M.A.S.H.So again we had no use for this outdated hospital system. Yes it was $2 million, but we gain some partnership with them, in any future U.N. missions, and other help from time to time. We did not leave sensitive Combat gear, and or newer Equipment like our MTVR's. This happens all the time and is how we are able to up date the fleets. By the way they do purchase the equipment under Military to Military Foreign sales, so yes we do get money for the stuff we left behind, example the droller value we left behind in Pakistan.

Response by SFC Everett Oliver made Oct 10 at 2016 7:30 PM

SFC Everett Oliver — Mon, 10 Oct 2016 19:30:03 -0400

In Nam we left vehicles and tanks in place and dumped Choppers overboard.... I hope they did as much damage as possible to all that equipment left behind....

Response by CAPT Kevin B. made Oct 11 at 2016 1:03 AM

CAPT Kevin B. — Tue, 11 Oct 2016 01:03:18 -0400

Some are getting near it, but it's a total cost equation of cost to ship, cost to run through Depot refurbishment, cost to inventory and store typically with less than new shelf life. M1 Abrams are a notable exception as we have a fixed number of frames and they're upgraded to the latest from the shell on up. So the number crunchers figure it out. Yes we leave stuff supposedly as MIL to MIL support. Problem is it can wind up in the hands of the bad guys. That's a more recent (past 15 years) experience that takes a bit to get those risk factors into the mix. That should increase the amount of destruction on site conclusions.

Response by PO1 William "Chip" Nagel made Oct 11 at 2016 2:33 AM

PO1 William "Chip" Nagel — Tue, 11 Oct 2016 02:33:05 -0400

Not Surprised at all remember the miles and miles of expensive cars near the pier in Dubai. Amount of crap just laying around both Military and Civilian is Just Amazing.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 11 at 2016 9:21 AM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 11 Oct 2016 09:21:56 -0400

This actually comes down to cost. For example, how much in transportation costs do you think it'd take to move MRAPs, MATVs, etc., from Afghanistan to a garrison base in the US? The cost of fuel alone is in several millions, if not billions of dollars. This comes down to a $400 per gallon price due to several factors, mostly in regards to fuel transport utilizing fuel inefficient vehicles such as . Most of those vehicles were assembled in Afghanistan with parts shipped over, as the logistics of fully assembling vehicles stateside then shipping them over cost too much.
In times like this, the US Military does not have the budget to spend to get them back, and would rather leave them rather than cannibalize or salvage them in other fashions. This is how the US can take the opportunity to sell these vehicles to other countries to recoup the amount of funds spent on these vehicles.

Take a look at the following articles:
http://www.cnbc.com/2014/12/17/you-know-whos-not-getting-cheap-gas-the-us-military.html
http://www.offiziere.ch/wp-content/uploads/us_ad_EnergySecurity052010.pdf
https://warisboring.com/heres-how-the-military-wasted-your-money-in-afghanistan-b392e3e84e5a#.mycwlf5lt
http://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/archive/2010/April/Pages/HowMuchforaGallonofGas.aspx
http://time.com/3651697/afghanistan-war-cost/
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2016/07/29/the-cost-to-maintain-an-afghan-military-vehicle-went-to-51395-from-1889-because-of-pentagon-mistakes-report-says/

Cheap oil doesn't apply to the US military

The military pays far more than civilians because of operations and safety and transport.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 12 at 2016 1:31 PM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 12 Oct 2016 13:31:12 -0400

sickening to me. Wasted 'jack' for sure. SPC Eddie Espejo

Response by MSgt Michael Smith made Oct 12 at 2016 2:25 PM

MSgt Michael Smith — Wed, 12 Oct 2016 14:25:56 -0400

6 Billion huh? Somehow I think that number might be a bit high.

Response by TSgt Lars Eilenfeld made Oct 13 at 2016 3:07 PM

TSgt Lars Eilenfeld — Thu, 13 Oct 2016 15:07:28 -0400

More expensive to ship than buy new

Response by SPC Brian Mason made Oct 17 at 2016 8:01 PM

SPC Brian Mason — Mon, 17 Oct 2016 20:01:38 -0400

Why? Because the IAF are a bunch of PUS****. Most, not all, run when there is an attack. The enemy/ISIS knows this and lets them run. They might kill a few, but getting 'free' stuff that America STUPIDLY gave them is atrocious.
We should have left that two countries to destroy themselves. The 'leadership'in this country is horrible and has NOT had our interests in top priority for years.